[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1613ba5c-9441-4aa8-6cdf-28af790eeaa6@xilinx.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 08:31:00 +0200
From: Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <monstr@...str.eu>
CC: Sai Krishna Potthuri <lakshmi.sai.krishna.potthuri@...inx.com>,
Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>,
<linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>, Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: adc: Fix coding style violations
On 8.8.2017 17:52, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-08-08 at 14:04 +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>> From: Sai Krishna Potthuri <lakshmi.sai.krishna.potthuri@...inx.com>
> []
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/xilinx-xadc.h b/drivers/iio/adc/xilinx-xadc.h
> []
>> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ struct xadc_ops {
>> int (*setup)(struct platform_device *pdev, struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>> int irq);
>> void (*update_alarm)(struct xadc *, unsigned int);
>> - unsigned long (*get_dclk_rate)(struct xadc *);
>> + unsigned long (*get_dclk_rate)(struct xadc *xadc);
>> irqreturn_t (*interrupt_handler)(int, void *);
>
> Doesn't it seem odd to you that the lines above and below
> have the same form?
>
> checkpatch is an imperfect tool.
> It will always be imperfect.
> Please use your eyes and mind too.
You are right. I have missed that in internal review. Fixed in v2.
Thanks,
Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists